Latest Articles from European Science Editing Latest 20 Articles from European Science Editing https://ese.arphahub.com/ Thu, 28 Mar 2024 19:31:41 +0200 Pensoft FeedCreator https://ese.arphahub.com/i/logo.jpg Latest Articles from European Science Editing https://ese.arphahub.com/ Enhancing scientific publishing: automatic conversion to JATS XML https://ese.arphahub.com/article/114977/ European Science Editing 49: e114977

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2023.e114977

Authors: Ljiljana Jertec Musap

Abstract: JATS XML (Journal Article Tag Suite) is an XML-based format used for publishing scholarly content. It has multiple advantages over traditional publishing methods but faces adoption challenges due to the need for relatively expensive tools and/or manual work. In 2023, the HRČAK Portal’s team enabled automatic full-text con-version from DOCX to JATS XML which does not require prior knowledge of XML nor additional tools. Created JATS facilitates content and reference mining as well as transformation to HTML. It also improves cross-device compatibility and produces interactive links for an enhanced reading experience.

HTML

XML

PDF

]]>
Viewpoint Fri, 22 Dec 2023 08:00:00 +0200
Digital transformation in education: a bibliometric analysis using Scopus https://ese.arphahub.com/article/107138/ European Science Editing 49: e107138

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2023.e107138

Authors: Thao Trinh Thi Phuong, Tien-Trung Nguyen, Nam Nguyen Danh, Dinh Ngo Van, Hoang Dinh Luong, Le Van An Nguyen, Trung Tran

Abstract: Background: Digital transformation refers to applying digital technology in various fields of society. In the last 5 years, digital transformation has spread to most areas of social life, including education. However, research on digital transformation in education is still fragmented.Objectives: The aim of the study was to present a comprehensive review of studies on digital transformation in education using bibliometric analysis.Methods: We searched the Scopus database from inception to 1 January 2023 using the search terms ‘digital transformation’ AND ‘education’ within abstracts, keywords, or titles of journal articles or conference papers written in English. The retrieved articles were analysed using VOSviewer and Biblioshiny tools.Results: A total of 1329 relevant studies were retrieved. Although the first paper in this field was published in 1999, the number of publications has increased rapidly only in the past 4 years. The most influential countries in this field are the developed countries (Russian Federation, Germany, and the United States), but scholars from the developing countries (Indonesia and Thailand) are among the most productive. Papers on digital transformation are frequently published in journals with lower rankings within the Scopus database. Using VOSviewer for keyword co-occurrence analysis, we classified the research topics related to digital transformation in educa-tion into four main groups: digital transformation in higher education under the impact of the coronavirus disease pandemic 2019 pandemic, applying the technolo-gies of the Fourth Industrial Revolution to education, digitization and digital compe-tence in education in the context of digital transformation, and learning forms using technology (for example, e-learning, m-learning, and blended learning) in higher-education institutions.Conclusions: Four research trends related to digital transformation in education were identified. These trends may also change as digital transformation continues to develop.

HTML

XML

PDF

]]>
Original Article Tue, 12 Dec 2023 19:00:00 +0200
Opinion on open-science practices and the importance of scientists’ information literacy skills in context of open science at the University of Rijeka, Croatia – a cross-sectional study https://ese.arphahub.com/article/106656/ European Science Editing 49: e106656

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2023.e106656

Authors: Dejana Golenko, Evgenia Arh, Ksenija Bazdaric

Abstract: Background: Although opinions of scientists about open access and the importance of their skills in information literacy have been investigated earlier but not, to our knowledge, of those in Croatia.Objective: The objective was to analyse the opinions on open access and on open-science practices before implementing open-science policies.Methods: Scientists at the University of Rijeka (N = 1256) were invited to complete, anonymously, an online questionnaire on open science (Google Forms) in 2020 and their responses were analysed.Results: Altogether 192 participants (a response rate 15%) were involved in this study, of which 110 (57%) were women. The mean age of the participants was 42 years (stand-ard deviation 11). The participants pursued careers in biomedical (37%), social (31%), or technical (14%) sciences; 20% were early-career researchers or postdoctoral research-ers, and 80% held the rank of assistant professor or higher. Most of them (88%) agreed that journals should be open access and 77% said they would choose the open-access journal if they had to choose between two journals with similar impact factors. Most (83%) considered publishing fees (article processing charges) to be too high; fewer than half (45%) considered the impact factor to be more important than open access; and 28% believed open access journals to be of lower quality. Nearly three-fourths (74%) had published at least one article in an open access journal, and 45%, without paying any fee. Only a few (10.9%) archived their articles in institutional or national repositories; more than a quarter (27%), on their web pages; and close to half (43%), on their social networks. To obtain papers not available to read online, more than half (56%) used Sci-Hub; slightly more than half (51%) wrote to the authors; 40% asked col-leagues for help; and 35% approached a librarian.Conclusions: Most of the scientists in our study were in favour of open access but con-sidered the publication fees to be too high. Their archiving was inadequate: few used any institutional or national repositories. Therefore, the scientists need to be more information literate and require guidance and help from librarians and will benefit from training in information literacy including the principles of open access.

HTML

XML

PDF

]]>
Original Article Fri, 13 Oct 2023 07:18:00 +0300
Impact of war on editors of science journals from Ukraine: Results of a survey https://ese.arphahub.com/article/97925/ European Science Editing 49: e97925

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2023.e97925

Authors: Maryna Zhenchenko, Iryna Izarova, Yulia Baklazhenko

Abstract: Background: The war influences every step of the publishing process from the organ-izational structure of the journal and its business model to the psychological and financial well-being of its staff.Objectives: The main aim of our research was to collect and analyse data on how the war has changed the operation and daily lives of those who work in editorial services and how significantly it has impacted their job and work.Methods: The surveyed population comprised the staff on the scientific journals listed in the Ukrainian electronic register of the state scientific institution, namely the Ukrainian Institute of Scientific and Technical Expertise and Information. The participants were asked to complete a questionnaire designed to collect data on the background and activities of the journal during wartime.Results: Among a total of 160 respondents (a response rate of 13.2%), 85 (53.1%) expe-rienced changes in editorial structure and work, particularly evident in fewer articles (mentioned by 71, or 44.4%, respondents), a switch to working remotely owing to relo-cation of staff (38, or 23.8%, respondents), changes in the frequency of publication (34, or 21.3%, respondents), changes in the topics covered in the articles (25, or 15.6%, respondents), and staff cuts (16, or 10%, respondents).Conclusions: Ukrainian editors continued their work despite severe psychological difficulties and financial dependency. The editors expect greater support from the international community and suggestions on practical strategies to deal with the challenges without significant losses. Continuing surveys to identify problems arising from the changing conditions were also recommended.

HTML

XML

PDF

]]>
Original Article Tue, 16 May 2023 08:00:00 +0300
Is it open access if registration is required to obtain scientific content? https://ese.arphahub.com/article/98101/ European Science Editing 49: e98101

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2023.e98101

Authors: Yuki Yamada, Andreas Nishikawa-Pacher, Jaime A. Teixeira da Silva

Abstract: Some journals require users to register before accessing a scientific paper, despite labelling that content as open access (OA) and free-of-charge. We refer to such cases as members-only OA (MOOA), which we contend is not ‘free’ since users are forced to ‘pay’ with personal data. Scholarly content may be accessible via MOOA to either the in-browser text (HTML) or to the archival-friendly version (PDF), or both. We suggest a four-tier typology to capture the degree of openness based on this observation. We believe that technical guidelines of OA implementation should not permit MOOA.

HTML

XML

PDF

]]>
Viewpoint Wed, 12 Apr 2023 09:00:00 +0300
Artistic licence: artwork permission practices at The Lancet group https://ese.arphahub.com/article/96778/ European Science Editing 49: e96778

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2023.e96778

Authors: Danielle S. Gash, Christopher H. Wortley

Abstract: Artwork within publications, broadly covering non-text items including graphs, diagrams, and photographs, is typically published under a copyright licence, and permission for the reproduction of such items needs to be sought. The various image rights can be difficult to navigate, especially in the era of open access, and thus at The Lancet, we have developed a streamlined workflow to guide our teams on artwork permission processes in our journals. We present a practical guide for other publishing professionals, which can be adapted to meet their resources and needs.

HTML

XML

PDF

]]>
Viewpoint Tue, 14 Mar 2023 08:00:00 +0200
Should editors with multiple retractions or a record of academic misconduct serve on journal editorial boards? https://ese.arphahub.com/article/95926/ European Science Editing 48: e95926

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2022.e95926

Authors: Jaime A. Teixeira da Silva

Abstract: In the academic world, despite their corrective nature, there is still a negative stigma attached to retractions, even more so if they are based on ethical infractions. Editors-in-chief and editors are role models in academic and scholarly communities. Thus, if they have multiple retractions or a record of academic misconduct, this viewpoint argues that they should not serve on journals’ editorial boards. The exception is where such individuals have displayed a clear path of scholarly reform. Policy and guidance is needed by organizations such as the Committee on Publication Ethics.

HTML

XML

PDF

]]>
Viewpoint Wed, 21 Dec 2022 07:35:00 +0200
Anonymity in anonymized peer review is incompatible with preprints https://ese.arphahub.com/article/91290/ European Science Editing 48: e91290

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2022.e91290

Authors: Jaime Teixeira da Silva

Abstract:

HTML

XML

PDF

]]>
Correspondence Mon, 3 Oct 2022 19:00:00 +0300
Stop paying to be published Open Access -  a French perspective https://ese.arphahub.com/article/90113/ European Science Editing 48: e90113

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2022.e90113

Authors: Olivier Pourret

Abstract: Commentary on open access

HTML

XML

PDF

]]>
Correspondence Mon, 22 Aug 2022 10:25:00 +0300
Challenges of qualitative data sharing in social sciences https://ese.arphahub.com/article/77781/ European Science Editing 48: e77781

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2022.e77781

Authors: Tanja Vuckovic Juros

Abstract: Open science offers hope for new accountability and transparency in social sciences. Nevertheless, it still fails to fully consider the complexities of qualitative research, as exemplified by a reflection on sensitive qualitative data sharing. As a result, the developing patterns of rewards and sanctions promoting open science raise concern that quantitative research, whose “replication crisis” brought the open science movement to life, will benefit from “good science” re-evaluations at the expense of other research epistemologies, despite the necessity to define accountability and transparency in social sciences more widely and not to conflate those with either reproducibility or data sharing.

HTML

XML

PDF

]]>
Viewpoint Mon, 4 Apr 2022 09:30:00 +0300
Let’s publish full-text scientific articles in HTML, not just PDF https://ese.arphahub.com/article/75834/ European Science Editing 47: e75834

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2021.e75834

Authors: Libor Ansorge

Abstract: The digital age has enabled unprecedented opportunities in the dissemination of information. Thanks to the Internet, research results are available to virtually anyone in the world. Thanks to platforms such as the Open Journal System, a scientific journal can be published by practically anyone with minimal demands on resources, and even a relatively small editorial team can focus more on the quality of published articles than on the editorial process itself. Nevertheless, publishing procedures have recently been adopted which do not allow parts of readers to have seamless access to the content of scientific articles.

HTML

XML

PDF

]]>
Correspondence Tue, 23 Nov 2021 10:00:00 +0200
The need for a new set of measures to assess the impact of research in earth sciences in Indonesia https://ese.arphahub.com/article/59032/ European Science Editing 47: e59032

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2021.e59032

Authors: Dasapta Erwin Irawan, Juneman Abraham, Jonathan Peter Tennant, Olivier Pourret

Abstract: Background: Earth sciences is one of those sensitive field sciences that are closely needed to solve local problems within local physical and social settings. Earth researchers find state-of-the-art of topics in earth sciences by using scientific databases, conduct research on the topics, and write about them. However, the accessibility, readability, and usability of those articles for local communities are major problems in measuring the impact of research, although it may be covered by well-known international scientific databases.Objectives: To ascertain empirically whether there are differences in document distribution, in the proportions of openly accessible documents, and in the geographical coverage of earth sciences topics as revealed through analyses of documents retrieved from scientific databases and to propose new measures for assessing the impact of research in earth sciences based on those differences.Methods: Relevant documents were retrieved using ‘earth sciences’ as a search term in English and other languages from ten databases of scientific publications. The results of these searches were analysed using frequency analysis and a quantitative- descriptive design.Results: (1) The number of articles in English from international databases exceeded the number of articles in native languages from national-level databases. (2) The number of open-access (OA) articles in the national databases was higher than that in other databases. (3) The geographical coverage of earth science papers was uneven between countries when the number of documents retrieved from closed-access commercial databases was compared to that from the other databases. (4) The regulations in Indonesia related to promotion of lecturers assign greater weighting to publications indexed in Scopus and the Web of Science (WoS) and publications in journals with impact factors are assigned a higher weighting.Conclusions: The dominance of scientific articles in English as well as the paucity of OA publications indexed in international databases (compared to those in national or regional databases) may have been due to the greater weighting assigned to such publications. Consequently, the relevance of research reported in those publications to local communities has been questioned. This article suggests some open-science practices to transform the current regulations related to promotion into a more responsible measurement of research performance and impact.

HTML

XML

PDF

]]>
Original Article Thu, 8 Jul 2021 09:00:00 +0300
International disparities in open access practices in the Earth Sciences https://ese.arphahub.com/article/63663/ European Science Editing 47: e63663

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2021.e63663

Authors: Olivier Pourret, David William Hedding, Daniel Enrique Ibarra, Dasapta Erwin Irawan, Haiyan Liu, Jonathan Peter Tennant

Abstract: Background: Open access (OA) implies free and unrestricted access to and re-use of research articles. Recently, OA publishing has seen a new wave of interest, debate, and practices surrounding that mode of publishing.Objectives: To provide an overview of publication practices and to compare them among six countries across the world to stimulate further debate and to raise awareness about OA to facilitate decision-making on further development of OA practices in earth sciences.Methods: The number of OA articles, their distribution among the six countries, and top ten journals publishing OA articles were identified using two databases, namely Scopus and the Web of Science, based mainly on the data for 2018.Results: In 2018, only 24%–31% of the total number of articles indexed by either of the databases were OA articles. Six of the top ten earth sciences journals that publish OA articles were fully OA journals and four were hybrid journals. Fully OA journals were mostly published by emerging publishers and their article processing charges ranged from $1000 to $2200.Conclusions: The rise in OA publishing has potential implications for researchers and tends to shift article-processing charges from organizations to individuals. Until the earth sciences community decides to move away from journal-based criteria to evaluate researchers, it is likely that such high costs will continue to maintain financial inequities within this research community, especially to the disadvantage of researchers from the least developed countries. However, earth scientists, by opting for legal self- archiving of their publications, could help to promote equitable and sustainable access to, and wider dissemination of, their work.

HTML

XML

PDF

]]>
Original Article Thu, 10 Jun 2021 10:30:00 +0300
The "ize" have it - reflections on spelling and its rules https://ese.arphahub.com/article/59855/ European Science Editing 47: e59855

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2020.e59855

Authors: Denys Wheatley

Abstract: A brief discussion is presented of the use of "ize" rather than "ise" in most current day journals. The need for editors and authors to be consistent in their spelling remains an issue.

HTML

XML

PDF

]]>
Viewpoint Tue, 4 May 2021 10:00:00 +0300
Exploring the relationship between journal indexing and article processing charges of journals published by MDPI, the Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute https://ese.arphahub.com/article/54523/ European Science Editing 46: e54523

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2020.e54523

Authors: Hilary Okagbue, Jaime Teixeira da Silva, Timothy Anake

Abstract: The Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute (MDPI) is a prominent open access (OA) publisher that uses article processing charges (APCs) as its business model. Our objective was to determine the association between the APCs levied by MDPI journals and 1) their inclusion in Scopus and Web of Science databases or 2) their stature, as represented by their CiteScore (Elsevier’s Scopus) and Impact Factor (awarded by Clarivate Analytics). Among the 227 journals published by MDPI, 51 had both IF and CiteScore; 107, only a CiteScore; and 84, neither IF nor CiteScore. The charges levied by the journals varied widely, from 0 to CHF 2000 (Swiss francs), the most frequent figure (159 journals) being CHF 1000, or about €930. The amount of APCs was found to be correlated to IF (R² = 0.64; p <0.001; 107 journals) and also to CiteScore (R² = 0.619; p <0.001; 53 journals). The charges levied by journals that had both IF and CiteScore were significantly higher than those charged by journals with neither IF nor CiteScore (p <0.05). The charges were also correlated to the age of the journal: the more recently launched journals charged less than the older journals did.

HTML

XML

PDF

]]>
Original Article Thu, 24 Dec 2020 10:00:00 +0200
Web of Science and Scopus are not global databases of knowledge https://ese.arphahub.com/article/51987/ European Science Editing 46: e51987

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2020.e51987

Authors: Jonathan P. Tennant

Abstract: Both Web of Science and Scopus are critical components of the current research ecosystem, providing the basis for university and global rankings as well as for bibliometric research. However, both platforms are structurally biased against research produced in non-Western countries, non-English language research, and research from the arts, humanities, and social sciences. This viewpoint emphasizes the damage that these systematic inequities inflict upon global knowledge production systems and the need for research funders to unite to form a more globally representative, non-profit, community-controlled infrastructure for the global pool of research knowledge.

HTML

XML

PDF

]]>
Viewpoint Tue, 27 Oct 2020 10:30:00 +0200
Suggestions for fortifying the discoverability of papers published in European Science Editing https://ese.arphahub.com/article/57377/ European Science Editing 46: e57377

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2020.e57377

Authors: Jaime Teixeira da Silva

Abstract: European Science Editing (ESE), a platinum open access journal, is gaining recognition as one of the prime outlets for publishing-related topics, as evidenced by its 2019 rise into the second quarter of Scimago’s Journal Rankings and by its Scopus CiteScore of 1.3. However, the discoverability of knowledge and information in ESE is currently limited by the fact that manuscripts published before 2003 are not indexed, that none of the papers published before May 2016 have a DOI, and that not all information that appears on the html version of a paper appears on its PDF version, and vice versa. Finally, because ESE is already indexed in the Directory of Open Access Journals, all papers should be archived on that platform. Such improvements would undoubtedly take time and some resources, but if they could be achieved, the discoverability of the journal would clearly be fortified.

HTML

XML

PDF

]]>
Correspondence Thu, 17 Sep 2020 10:00:00 +0300
The Russian Science Citation Index (RSCI): the first three years (2016–2018) https://ese.arphahub.com/article/51051/ European Science Editing 46: e51051

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2020.e51051

Authors: Sergey V Gorin, Anna M Koroleva, Alexey N Gerasimov, Alexander A Voronov

Abstract: Objective: To observe changes in the number, form (print and online), and distribution (by academic disciplines) of Russian journals indexed in the first three years of the Russian Science Citation Index (RSCI).Background: The globalization of science and the need to involve Russia in the international process of knowledge exchange have influenced the main directions of publication activity and interaction with the world scientific community. Methods: Statistical information freely available through the databases of the Scientific Electronic Library of Russia for January 2019 were compared with data from January 2016. Results: In 2016, the number of Russian journals included in the RSCI was 650; by 2019, the number had increased to 771, an increase of 18.6%. The number of journals with printed and online versions increased by 13.3% to reach 266 units. The number of Russian journals indexed in Scopus and the Web of Science databases increased during the period, as did the number of journals with both print and online versions.Conclusions: Journals from the RSCI database tend also to be added to Scopus or WoS databases and do not remain exclusively as part of the local database. Implementing the RSCI project had a positive impact on the full spectrum of Russian academic journals, which are increasingly committed to improving their work to continue to be part of RSCI or Scopus or WoS databases.

HTML

XML

PDF

]]>
Original Article Thu, 27 Aug 2020 10:00:00 +0300
Building transparency and trust in industry-sponsored clinical research through open access publishing https://ese.arphahub.com/article/54172/ European Science Editing 46: e54172

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2020.e54172

Authors: Barbara DeCastro, Anna Geraci, Jayme Trott, G. Peter Snyder, Yaswant Dayaram

Abstract: A desire for both transparency in research and widespread access to the results of research has led to activism in support of open access publishing. Open access publishing, particularly publishing industry-sponsored research, can be complex. The overarching benefits of, and challenges to, open access are described, illustrated with the initiatives related to Medical Publishing Insights and Practices to help promote a better understanding of open access and its importance in ensuring transparency in industry-sponsored research.

HTML

XML

PDF

]]>
Viewpoint Mon, 24 Aug 2020 11:00:00 +0300
European Science Editing is in full open access now https://ese.arphahub.com/article/50566/ European Science Editing 46: e50566

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2020.e50566

Authors: Ksenija Bazdaric

Abstract: I am excited to announce that with this volume European Science Editing (ESE) has shifted from the print to a fully digital open access version. The journal underwent several changes last year. First of all, our publisher, the European Association of Science Editors (EASE) was generously offered – and accepted – a new ARPHA submission system (powered by PenSoft). Together with the EASE president Pippa Smart and EASE Council, we decided to transform ESE into a fully open access online journal. After several months of planning and re-thinking our strategy, a small working group (some members of the EASE Council and of ESE’s associate editors) prepared a proposal, the main idea of which was to divide the journal in two overlapping publications: European Science Editing and EASE Digest. The former will continue to publish original articles, reviews (formerly “essays”), viewpoints, and correspondence using the fully open access ARPHA submission system (flow publishing) but will drop the other sections, namely News notes, The editor’s bookshelf, This site I like, and EASE Forum Digest). These sections, which our readers consider particularly valuable, will now be published in EASE Digest with a few selected articles from ESE. The Digest will be available to EASE members only. As the proposal was accepted by the EASE Council in September 2019, the journal’s transformation is already under way. I wish to thank Silvia Maina (This site I like), Fiona Murphy (Book reviews), Elise Langdon-Neuner (EASE-Forum Digest), Anna Maria Rossi (The Editor’s bookshelf), and James Hartley and Denys Wheatley (members of the International Advisory Board) for the great work they have done and for their cooperation.

HTML

XML

PDF

]]>
Editorial Tue, 18 Feb 2020 16:00:00 +0200